Who should Hillary pick as her VP choice?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:26:51 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Who should Hillary pick as her VP choice?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
Poll
Question: Who should be Hillary Clinton pick for vice presidential candidate in 2016?
#1
Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin)
 
#2
Joe Biden (Delaware)
 
#3
Michael Bloomberg (New York)
 
#4
Cory Booker (New Jersey)
 
#5
Julian Castro (Texas)
 
#6
Steven Chu (Missouri)
 
#7
George Clooney (Kentucky)
 
#8
Andrew Cuomo (New York)
 
#9
Howard Dean (Vermont)
 
#10
Ellen DeGeneres (Louisiana)
 
#11
Rahm Emanuel (Illinois)
 
#12
Dianne Feinstein (California)
 
#13
Al Franken (Minnesota)
 
#14
Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota)
 
#15
Mazie Hirono (Hawaii)
 
#16
Kirsten Gillibrand (New York)
 
#17
Al Gore (Tennessee)
 
#18
Jennifer Granholm (Michigan)
 
#19
Christine Gregoire (Washington)
 
#20
John Hickenlooper (Colorado)
 
#21
Ashley Judd (Kentucky)
 
#22
Joseph P. Kennedy III (Massachusetts)
 
#23
John Kerry (Massachusetts)
 
#24
Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota)
 
#25
Mary Landrieu (Louisiana)
 
#26
Joe Manchin (West Virginia)
 
#27
Jack Markell (Delaware)
 
#28
Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
 
#29
Ernest Moniz (Massachusetts)
 
#30
Janet Napolitano (Arizona)
 
#31
Jay Nixon (Missouri)
 
#32
Martin O'Malley (Maryland)
 
#33
Deval Patrick (Massachusetts)
 
#34
Nancy Pelosi (California)
 
#35
Colin Powell (New York)
 
#36
Susan Rice (Washington D.C.)
 
#37
Bill Richardson (New Mexico)
 
#38
Ken Salazar (Colorado)
 
#39
Chuck Schumer (New York)
 
#40
Brian Schweitzer (Montana)
 
#41
Kathleen Sebelius (Kansas)
 
#42
Eric Shinseki (Hawaii)
 
#43
Antonio Villaraigosa (California)
 
#44
Mark Warner (Virginia)
 
#45
Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts)
 
#46
Oprah Winfrey (Mississippi)
 
#47
Someone else (please specify in thread)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 105

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: Who should Hillary pick as her VP choice?  (Read 19226 times)
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: July 22, 2013, 07:05:09 PM »

I'm not a big Sherrod Brown fan, but he would be a fairly strong pick if Hillary really needs liberals. Plus, he would double down on a populist image that can win very swingy areas like Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia, where the right kind of Demcorat can win, and the wrong kind of democrat can lose by 20 points or more.
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: July 22, 2013, 07:36:21 PM »

I think Joe Manchin would be perfect.
Logged
PolitiJunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,124


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: July 22, 2013, 07:42:59 PM »

I'm not a big Sherrod Brown fan, but he would be a fairly strong pick if Hillary really needs liberals. Plus, he would double down on a populist image that can win very swingy areas like Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia, where the right kind of Demcorat can win, and the wrong kind of democrat can lose by 20 points or more.

Exactly- he is way on the liberal end of the Democratic Party, but at the same time he has a populist appeal due to his work with jobs in the Rust Belt that could allow him to appeal to states like AR/KY/WV/MO (states where Hillary already appeals a hundred times more than most Democrats). This would be a VERY formidable ticket.
Logged
Mordecai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,465
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: December 01, 2013, 04:08:27 PM »

Tammy Baldwin: No
Joe Biden: No
Michael Bloomberg: No
Cory Booker: Maybe
Julian Castro: No
Steven Chu: No
George Clooney: No
Andrew Cuomo: No
Howard Dean: No
Ellen DeGeneres: No
Rahm Emanuel: No
Dianne Feinstein: No
Al Franken: No
Heidi Heitkamp: No
Mazie Hirono: No
Kirsten Gillibrand: No
Al Gore: No
Jennifer Granholm: No
Christine Gregoire: No
John Hickenlooper: Yes
Ashley Judd: No
Joseph P. Kennedy III: No
John Kerry: No
Amy Klobuchar: No
Mary Landrieu: No
Joe Manchin: No
Jack Markell: Maybe
Bob Menendez: No
Ernest Moniz: No
Janet Napolitano: No
Jay Nixon: No
Martin O'Malley: Yes
Deval Patrick: Maybe
Nancy Pelosi: No
Colin Powell: No
Susan Rice: No
Bill Richardson: No
Ken Salazar: No
Chuck Schumer: No
Brian Schweitzer: No
Kathleen Sebelius: No
Eric Shinseki: No
Antonio Villaraigosa: No
Mark Warner: Maybe
Elizabeth Warren: No
Oprah Winfrey: No
Someone else: Tim Kaine, Sherrod Brown
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: December 01, 2013, 05:14:16 PM »

Honestly she should pick Becerra, Heitkamp or Heinrich.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: December 01, 2013, 06:01:17 PM »

She shouldn't be nominated in the first place
Logged
Lupo
Rookie
**
Posts: 119


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: December 01, 2013, 10:14:56 PM »

Tim Kaine
Logged
Bull Moose Base
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,488


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: December 01, 2013, 10:57:54 PM »

One more for the list: Gary Locke, who's about to leave his post as Ambassador to China, has foreign policy experience without association with the reviled United States Congress. He was also a governor for 8 years, Secretary of Commerce, and a Hillary 2008 co-chair,
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: December 01, 2013, 11:06:02 PM »

One more for the list: Gary Locke, who's about to leave his post as Ambassador to China, has foreign policy experience without association with the reviled United States Congress. He was also a governor for 8 years, Secretary of Commerce, and a Hillary 2008 co-chair,

He also has regular guy appeal, because he buys his own coffee:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2011/08/15/new-china-envoys-airport-antics-rile-chinese-internet/
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: December 02, 2013, 12:20:40 AM »

Either Mark Warner or Julian Castro, depending upon which direction she chooses to go in.
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: December 02, 2013, 11:25:01 AM »
« Edited: December 02, 2013, 11:41:17 AM by eric82oslo »

Either Mark Warner or Julian Castro, depending upon which direction she chooses to go in.

I agree. The main contenders for a VP spot right now seems to me to be:

*Julian Castro (Could put a couple more latino states in play, at least Arizona, Texas and possibly North Carolina, while simultaneusly securing the all-important Florida, Colorado, New Jersey & Virginia - at the same time it'll enable him to get groomed for the inevitable big crowning of 2024.)
*Marc Warner (One of the most popular Senators the US has seen for the past decade or two, and possibly the single Senator with the highest approval rating right now in his own home state. Will almost certainly secure Virginia for Hillary on his own. Is almost as popular with local Republicans as with Democrats which implies he's also the closest the Democratic party has of a Chris Christie kind of cross-over appeal politician. Will be very well received in other battleground states as well I think, due to his moderate, folksy & likeable nature. His Southern base could be crucial in Hillary's efforts to secure victories in Florida, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee & Missouri.)
*Elizabeth Warren (Will be a controversial choice due to her high age and her partisan nature, but will certainly fire up the Demcratic base as well as securing a populist message to infiltrate traditionally working class areas of important battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan, plus Hillary-strong working class states like Kentucky and West Virginia.)
*Kirsten Gillibrand (Possibly the most talented female politician the country has ever seen, and just like Julian Castro, most definitely a strong presidential contender in the future, 10-20 years on from now. Hillary is likely to have the future in mind and think cross-generational. Kirsten will bring a lot of fresh, youthful energy to her campaign, perhaps elevating Hillary's spirit and physical-emotional health as a direct consequence.)

An interesting article on the rise of female power within the Democratic party: http://thehill.com/opinion/juan-williams/191675-juan-williams-dems-are-now-party-of-women
Logged
whanztastic
Rookie
**
Posts: 242


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: December 02, 2013, 11:51:15 AM »

Xavier Becerra is certainly an overlooked choice. Probably #1 for me. The Castro brothers are unlikely but I'd go Joaquín Castro over Julian, simply cannot make the jump from Mayor of a smaller city to VP.

Sherrod Brown would be an interesting pick. Gary Locke would also have my support.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: December 02, 2013, 07:52:19 PM »

Xavier Becerra is certainly an overlooked choice. Probably #1 for me. The Castro brothers are unlikely but I'd go Joaquín Castro over Julian, simply cannot make the jump from Mayor of a smaller city to VP.

Sherrod Brown would be an interesting pick. Gary Locke would also have my support.
I agree that neither Castro should be VP, but San Antonio is NOT a "smaller city," it's the 7th largest in the entire country.
Logged
whanztastic
Rookie
**
Posts: 242


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: December 02, 2013, 11:36:48 PM »

Xavier Becerra is certainly an overlooked choice. Probably #1 for me. The Castro brothers are unlikely but I'd go Joaquín Castro over Julian, simply cannot make the jump from Mayor of a smaller city to VP.

Sherrod Brown would be an interesting pick. Gary Locke would also have my support.
I agree that neither Castro should be VP, but San Antonio is NOT a "smaller city," it's the 7th largest in the entire country.

It's a bit small to me Cheesy
Logged
ShadowRocket
cb48026
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,456


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: December 03, 2013, 04:16:38 PM »

I've actually started to think that Jeff Merkley may not be a bad choice.  Obviously Oregon isn't a swing state, but two factors that Hillary may have to consider for her VP choice is that she is weak in the West and may do well to shore up her populist credentials, especially if a leftist challenge is able to gain some traction in the primaries.

Merkley satisfies both those credentials. Bennet and Heinrich are more often mentioned as far Western possibilities are concerned, but some downsides to consider are that Bennet will likely be facing a fairly competitve re-election bid and we'd probably lose Heinrich's seat due to gubernatorial appointment unless Martinez goes down next year.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: December 03, 2013, 10:26:55 PM »

I've actually started to think that Jeff Merkley may not be a bad choice.  Obviously Oregon isn't a swing state, but two factors that Hillary may have to consider for her VP choice is that she is weak in the West and may do well to shore up her populist credentials, especially if a leftist challenge is able to gain some traction in the primaries.

Merkley satisfies both those credentials. Bennet and Heinrich are more often mentioned as far Western possibilities are concerned, but some downsides to consider are that Bennet will likely be facing a fairly competitve re-election bid and we'd probably lose Heinrich's seat due to gubernatorial appointment unless Martinez goes down next year.
While that is true, anything that helps in a presidential election/ administration is worth an additional loss in a Senate seat, especially since a Hillary presidential win would probably have some coattails in 2010.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: December 03, 2013, 10:28:41 PM »

Well let's remember, according to this forum, Sherrod Brown should be Hillary's VP. I started with list polls of every Senator and Governor, and it all came down to him. So let's see how true the collective wisdom of this forum in 2013 turns out to be.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: December 08, 2013, 03:49:19 PM »

I suspect she'll go with Newsom. The base likes him. A younger candidate is a good match. He's been a loyal #2 in California, and his mayorality gives him strong executive experience. He also supported her in 2008.

Her best choices are probably Schweitzer or Warner. Schweitzer can be a strong campaigner in a region Hillary Clinton isn't associated with. Warner is qualified, and immensely popular in a crucial swing state.

Martin Heinrich could also be a solid choice as a younger western Senator.

Xavier Becerra could her with both the Congress in the presidency and Latino voters in the election.

Really shows you how terrible the bench is for vice presidential candidates. Gillibrand should be a shoe-in for any non-Hillary nominee, but for Hillary... I can say any of them would be that fantastic.

Still, I voted Patrick.
I don't think the bench is all that bad.

Geographic considerations probably take out a few of the potential national candidates, as does the likelihood that Hillary Clinton won't want another woman on the ticket.

That still leaves her with solid choices among the senators, governors and prominent politicians who hold other offices (Becerra, The Castro brothers, Newsom.)
I take back what I said about Schweitzer. He's less valuable without a Senate bid in 2014. And some of his recent statements make him a potentially risky pick, when Hillary wants someone safe.

Warner's still a great pick, due to his popularity in what may be the most important state in the election and his qualifications as a Governor and Senator. It would still be a ticket with two people in their 60s, which could be problematic.

Bennet in Colorado looks great on paper. He's young, comes from a western swing state, has major credibility on education and has been in the Senate long enough that he seems qualified for national office. I'd imagine he'd do pretty well in the vetting process.
Logged
whanztastic
Rookie
**
Posts: 242


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: December 09, 2013, 08:04:04 PM »

Bennet would also allow the birther nonsense to continue, given his birthplace.
Logged
Sec. of State Superique
Superique
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,305
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: December 09, 2013, 09:12:42 PM »

What about Mark Udall or Hickenlooper instead of Bennet?
Logged
Mordecai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,465
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: December 09, 2013, 09:44:25 PM »

Voted Biden, Kerry, Napolitano, Rice. Gore wouldn't accept.
You think Biden would want to be VP again? Or that Kerry would accept? They'd both be well into their 70s in 2016, have the baggage of their entire political careers and wouldn't energize the base at all. Rice is also still a Republican and tainted by the Bush administration. I think that considering Hillary is carrying the baggage of Benghazi, she should be looking for someone outside the Obama administration.

Most importantly and absolutely essential..........
NOT A WOMAN!
I agree with this also. I don't get why people would think another woman would be a realistic choice. Or someone even older than Hillary. Or has-beens like Biden and Kerry. Or city mayors and lieutenant governors.
Logged
Brewer
BrewerPaul
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,622


Political Matrix
E: -6.90, S: -6.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: December 09, 2013, 10:43:46 PM »

Six people voted for Joe Biden?! >_>

Anyways, Hillary should pick Mark Udall. He won't be that old in 2016, and damn, he LOOKS presidential. But that's just my biased obsessing.
Logged
Brewer
BrewerPaul
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,622


Political Matrix
E: -6.90, S: -6.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: December 09, 2013, 10:57:33 PM »

Voted Biden, Kerry, Napolitano, Rice. Gore wouldn't accept.
You think Biden would want to be VP again? Or that Kerry would accept? They'd both be well into their 70s in 2016, have the baggage of their entire political careers and wouldn't energize the base at all. Rice is also still a Republican and tainted by the Bush administration. I think that considering Hillary is carrying the baggage of Benghazi, she should be looking for someone outside the Obama administration.

Wrote that 6 months ago, you can't hold me accountable to anything I wrote longer than 6 days ago! Read your contract.

I guess because the question was "should" the contrarian point I was getting at was that the politics of the running mate don't matter and the only consideration should be whether someone could be president. I mean for goodness sake, look:

Six people voted for Joe Biden?! >_>

Anyways, Hillary should pick Mark Udall. He won't be that old in 2016, and damn, he LOOKS presidential. But that's just my biased obsessing.

No disrespect to Captain Brewer but who cares what someone looks like? They're your back-up president not your lover. Unless you're Jill Biden in which case both.

Also, I meant Susan Rice not Condi Rice. Hillary won't pick her because she's not a safe enough pick. But she's probably more qualified to be president than almost anyone else on that there list (and has more relevant experience than anyone in the buzzed about Republican field). But I think don't think Hillary will consider any of the names on my list.

Besides, my posts expire after 6 days.

Erm...Captain Brewer? Tongue

Also, looks do have a part to play even if you're running for Vice President. It's not a major part, obviously, but it's still there. Without looking at their backgrounds, I'd probably rather vote for someone like John Thune or Martin O'Malley as opposed to say... Barney Frank.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: December 09, 2013, 11:10:10 PM »

What about Mark Udall or Hickenlooper instead of Bennet?
We'll see how their reelections go.

Both are in their 60s. That could be an issue. I really don't see Hillary Clinton selecting an older running mate unless he brings something incredible to the ticket.

Voted Biden, Kerry, Napolitano, Rice. Gore wouldn't accept.
You think Biden would want to be VP again? Or that Kerry would accept? They'd both be well into their 70s in 2016, have the baggage of their entire political careers and wouldn't energize the base at all. Rice is also still a Republican and tainted by the Bush administration. I think that considering Hillary is carrying the baggage of Benghazi, she should be looking for someone outside the Obama administration.

Most importantly and absolutely essential..........
NOT A WOMAN!
I agree with this also. I don't get why people would think another woman would be a realistic choice. Or someone even older than Hillary. Or has-beens like Biden and Kerry. Or city mayors and lieutenant governors.
In most cases, I agree with you.

Castro does bring something unique to the ticket, even though it would be a major distraction to have the Democrats forced to debate whether he's qualified for national office in a way that wouldn't apply to Steve Bullock (who has been Governor for less time for a state with a smaller population.)

I don't think Newsom's a great choice, but I can't see Hillary completely ignoring one of the few current officeholders who backed her over Obama in '08.

Both mayors have somewhat high profiles, which may make it an easier sell to the people who care about that stuff. Giving a national address in 2012 or gaining national attention in 2004 make the mayors seem like plausible candidates for national office.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: December 09, 2013, 11:16:42 PM »

Regarding age…..keep in mind that 73 year old Bob Dole picked 61 year old Jack Kemp to be his running mate in 1996.  So no, I don't think it's out of the question for Clinton to pick someone over 60.  If there's a really compelling reason for her to do it, she would do it.  But over 70 (that is, as old as Biden is now, or older)?  Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.086 seconds with 15 queries.